Fleet. The battle of Waterloo was won on the playing-fields of Eton; a polo match immediately preceded the battle of Mirwan; the British Fleet at Gibraltar a few years ago played cricket at a moment when war seemed imminent. If the Territorial Army is to rise to its full measure of strength, it must be more intimately associated with the life of the nation, until it becomes the ambition of every able-bodied man to enter its ranks.

The foundations upon which to create a great citizen army have been well and truly laid during the past four years. The force has more than realised the anticipations of the military authorities. In his recent report, General Sir John French, the Inspector-General of the Forces, states:

...

"I have reason to believe that the system and methods adopted in the training and instruction of Territorial units show great improvement this year. I have found that the selection and appointment of younger and more up-to-date Brigadiers is already bearing good fruit. Some of the work I have seen carried out this year was quite extraordinary, and entirely surpassed my expectation, and I feel sure that the progress already attained can only result from the boundless energy and splendid spirit which pervades all ranks in the Territorial Force."

The task of the future is further to develop this second line with due regard, on the one hand, to our peculiar military needs, and, on the other, to the economic limitations imposed upon a Power which must fight to the death to maintain an unchallengeable supremacy afloat and cannot neglect the essential Regular Army for the defence of the Empire. The nation must realise that the secret of having plenty of enthusiasm and money in time of war lies in frugality of effort and money in time of peace.

There are about a million young men available between the ages of nineteen and twenty-four years of age after the requirements of the Navy and Army have been satisfied. Of these the military authorities want only just over 300,000 to fill the establishment of the Territorial Army to war strength, and they have already upwards of 260,000. The progress which has been made is magnificent, considering the high standard of service required. It now remains for the nation to fill up the ranks—as it can-by showing its appreciation of "the boundless energy and splendid spirit" of the Territorial Force; by ensuring that such voluntary service does not entail financial loss on those who render it, and by insisting that the local headquarters shall be as attractive as they can be made, and the conditions generally in the citizen army such that it will be the ambition of every young man to join it.

The more carefully the problem of Imperial Defence and of

Home Defence is surveyed, the more conclusively the facts emerge that we must have the following arms :

(1) A Navy of unchallengeable power-costing in the future from £40,000,000 to £45,000,000 a year-consisting of :

(a) Sea-going fleets able to win command of the sea against any probable combination.

(b) A large mobile defence, consisting of destroyers and submarines, for the protection of the coasts of the British Isles.

(2) Two armies-costing in the future from £27,000,000 to £29,000,000 a year--organised on the present basis:

(a) A Regular Army for the defence of India and the Oversea Dominions and Colonies.

(b) A Territorial Army for the defence of the British Isles against raids and as a reservoir from which in a really grave emergency, such as the South African War, the Regular Army could be reinforced.

These four lines of defence now cost the nation upwards of £72,000,000 annually, of which the Territorial Army absorbs only just over £3,000,000. In place of the latter force, it is proposed to have some form of compulsory service. Conscription costs Russia £56,000,000, Germany £47,000,000, France nearly £35,000,000, and Austria-Hungary £31,000,000 in direct Army Votes, apart from the loss to industry.

We, in an island, itself the centre of a maritime Empire, are asked to sacrifice all the advantages of position, jeopardise our essential Expeditionary Force, endanger our sea-power (and thereby imperil our food supply), injure our industry, and take upon ourselves a crushing financial and social burden which we cannot, and have no need to, bear. When the nation turns aside to embark on any such proposal, the Empire will be in imminent peril, for we shall be selling ourselves and our kindred to the first nation which defeats our attenuated fleets.

ARCHIBALD HURD.

TRIAL BY JURY IN OUR AFRICAN COLONIES.

IN these days of stress and change when old institutions are on their trial it might have been expected that such a timehonoured practice as trial by jury would have been beyond assault. It has been for long a part of our national life, and indeed it has even been suggested that the final cause of the British Constitution is to put a dozen capable men into the jury-box. It has been efficacious in rendering our liberties secure. It has enabled the average man to take a direct share in the highest administrative work. It has given him an interest in the constitution of his country, and in the welfare of his fellow citizens. Its results if not always beyond criticism have exhibited advantages which far outweigh its defects. But it is a growth which is seen in its fullest beauty in Great Britain itself. Transplant it to Ireland or India, and its perfect flower vanishes under the new conditions. In our Colonial Empire it shows a similar tendency to vary. Where the population is homogeneous and the course of life reproduces or resembles the Home routine, its working is satisfactory. Where the population is not homogeneous, and where life is unsettled, its working leaves much to be desired. A case has recently occurred in the comparatively new Colony of British East Africa where trial by jury has broken down in a conspicuous manner, and where it has been found necessary to redress and rectify the situation by the use of certain reserved powers of the Crown. If this were likely to be an isolated case there would be little reason to dwell upon it. Single miscarriages of justice may happen anywhere, and perhaps they are best let alone and forgotten. But the case referred to is a typical instance. The same circumstances may occur to-morrow, and if they do occur they will unquestionably produce the same result. There appears to be little or no dispute about the facts. Mr. Galbraith Cole, who is a scion of the Enniskillen family, and a stock-farmer in the Colony, had suffered much from the depredations of stock-thieves. On the night of April 9th last a three-quarter bred sheep was stolen, and on the 10th he received certain information regarding it. On the 11th, accompanied by his manager, he proceeded to search, and on entering a wood they found three natives in a hut skinning a sheep. Two of the party ran away, and Mr. Cole fired at one of them twice, wounding him with a bullet in the small of the back at the second shot. According to his own evidence and that of

his manager, he went up to him, looked on him as he lay on the
ground, and then left him in charge of the native who had not
run away. The matter was subsequently reported by the latter,
and then the investigation and trial followed. Mr. Cole made.
no report of what he had done, made no inquiries regarding the
man he had shot, and told the judge at the trial, in explanation
of his conduct, that he did not wish to go to any further trouble
in the matter. Noblesse oblige is a maxim evidently unknown
to, or disregarded by, this member of the house of Enniskillen.
This heartlessness is the worst feature of a bad case. Apart from
that fact, the circumstances are not uncommon in stock-stealing
countries. I have personally had to deal with many such cases.
In the Cape Colony, and in South Africa generally, the crime of
stock theft is the subject of stringent legislation, which throws
the onus of proving his innocence on an accused person found in
unlawful possession of stock. An owner whose stock has been
stolen will generally endeavour to recover his lost property, and
if he finds it in the possession of the thief he may use every
reasonable expedient to secure his capture, and if the thief will
not surrender he may use force to compel him to do so. The
defence generally set up in cases such as that of Cole suggests
that the owner, having caught the thief red-handed, so to speak,
called on him to surrender, that the deceased failed to do so, and
was then, after warning, fired on by the accused, without any
intention of inflicting death, but rather for the purpose of effect-
ing his capture. Cole was charged with murder or culpable
homicide under sections 299 and 300 of the Indian Penal Code,
which is criminal law in British East Africa, and was acquitted
on both charges. The case was mentioned in the House of
Commons, and Mr. Harcourt, the Colonial Secretary, stated that
a full report of the circumstances of this "unhappy case" was
coming to him, and that he must defer any statement until he had
an opportunity of considering it. "If, however, he found that
the system of trial by jury led to a constant miscarriage of justice
he would consider what further steps he might be able to take
to secure the protection of the native." Later on Sir Percy
Girouard, the Governor of the Colony, in replying to a deputation
of farmers on the question of stock thefts, said that "he spoke
plainly because nothing could be gained by glossing over palpable
facts, for even though the letter of the law might have been
carried out, its spirit had been violated in a manner to do great
harm to the progress of government in this country. The matter
had passed out of his hands, and, as they would have seen, had
been brought to the notice of the Imperial Government, both
privately and by the Government of this country, and the Secre-

tary of State had plainly stated that if he found trial by jury in East Africa led to a constant miscarriage of justice he would consider steps to prevent it. That was a very serious and weighty pronouncement, and one which he must beg the community to take to heart, for it indicated a set-back in the rapidly improving opinion of the condition of affairs in this country from which it would require all their time and care to recover." Up to this point the position was a perfectly clear one. A miscarriage of justice had taken place. The Secretary for the Colonies asked for time to give full consideration to all the facts of the case, promising to take steps to safeguard the interests of the native in case such miscarriages should be the "constant" result of trial by jury. The only fair inference from the statement of Mr. Harcourt is that if the Cole case stood alone he was not prepared to take the drastic step of interfering with the jury system in East Africa. Had the Secretary for the Colonies adhered to this position, his standpoint would have been an easy one. No one would have expected him to alter one of the fundamental usages of British administration on account of a single and isolated instance in which there had been a failure of justice. It may have been that the circumstances of the Cole case were too strong for him, and that apart from the general question of the adequacy of trial by jury in such cases, it was necessary to signalise in an emphatic way official disapprobation of Cole's conduct. The East Africa Order in Council of 1902 gives an extraordinary power to the Governor under certain circumstances. It is desirable to set out the article in question in full.

"25. (I.) Where it is shown by evidence on oath, to the satisfaction of the Commissioner, that any person is conducting himself so as to be dangerous to peace and good order in British Central Africa, or is endeavouring to excite enmity between the people of the Protectorate and his Majesty, or is intriguing against his Majesty's power and authority in the Protectorate, the Commissioner may, if he thinks fit, by writing under his hand and official seal, order that person to be deported from the Protectorate to such place as the Commissioner may direct."

What was the object of giving such powers to the Commissioner? What evil or mischief was anticipated? We are bound, in a case so intimately involving the liberty of the subject, to give a strict interpretation to this highly penal Article, especially in view of the fact that it is expressly provided that no appeal is to lie against an order of deportation made in this way. must take into account the circumstances and conditions of the population of British East Africa. There are the European settlers, the various native tribes, and the Indian populations in